Stress and Anxiety Among Correctional Health Care Professionals in a U.S. State Prison System During COVID-19.

Since prisons were an epicenter of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the experience of correctional health care professionals (HCPs) may differ from HCPs in other settings. This cross-sectional descriptive study assessed stress, anxiety, and burnout levels in home and work environments among HCPs employed by one U.S. state prison system during the period of initial COVID-19 vaccine rollout. Participants (N = 444) were invited to voluntarily participate in an anonymous questionnaire distributed by prison administration from March 1 through May 17, 2021. Measures were adapted from a prior study of noncorrectional HCPs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Descriptive statistics (mean; standard deviation; 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles), ranking measures that could alleviate anxiety and stress related to the pandemic, and qualitative responses were analyzed. Responses from 43% of HCPs (192) revealed that correctional HCPs experienced high levels of stress and anxiety at work and at home during the pandemic, with particularly high levels among females and registered nurses. Understanding and addressing these stressors will be of critical importance as prison systems work to avoid turnover of experienced HCPs in such specialized settings and also help inform human resource planning at state prison systems for future public health responses.

The resource team: A case study of a solitary confinement reform in Oregon.

The continued use of solitary confinement has sparked international public health and human rights criticisms and concerns. This carceral practice has been linked repeatedly to a range of serious psychological harms among incarcerated persons. Vulnerabilities to harm are especially dire for persons with preexisting serious mental illness ("SMI"), a group that is overrepresented in solitary confinement units. Although there have been numerous calls for the practice to be significantly reformed, curtailed, and ended altogether, few strategies exist to minimize its use for people with SMI and histories of violence against themselves or others. This case study describes the "Oregon Resource Team" (ORT), a pilot project adapted from a Norwegian officer-led, interdisciplinary team-based approach to reduce isolation and improve outcomes for incarcerated persons with SMI and histories of trauma, self-injury, and violence against others. We describe the ORT's innovative approach, the characteristics and experiences of incarcerated people who participated in it, its reported impact on the behavior, health, and well-being of incarcerated persons and correctional staff, and ways to optimize its effectiveness and expand its use.

A stepwise guide for healthcare professionals requesting compassionate release for patients who are incarcerated.

PURPOSE: Compassionate release is a process that allows for the early release or parole of some incarcerated people of advanced age, with life-limiting illness, complex medical care needs or significant functional decline. Despite the expansion of State and Federal compassionate release programs, this mechanism for release remains underutilized. Health-care professionals are central to the process of recommending compassionate release, but few resources exist to support these efforts. The purpose of this paper is to provide a guide for health-care professionals requesting compassionate release for patients who are incarcerated. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: This study is stepwise guide for health-care professionals requesting compassionate release for patients who are incarcerated. FINDINGS: This study describes the role of the health-care professional in requesting compassionate release and offers guidance to help them navigate the process of preparing a medical declaration or request for compassionate release. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: No prior publications have created a step-wise guide of this nature to aid health-care professionals through the compassionate release process.

"We just needed to open the door": a case study of the quest to end solitary confinement in North Dakota.

Solitary confinement is a widespread practice in US correctional facilities. Long-standing concerns about the physical and mental health effects of solitary confinement have led to litigation, legislation, and community activism resulting in many prison systems introducing policies or implementing legal mandates to reduce or eliminate its use. Yet little is known about the nature and effectiveness of policies that states have adopted to reduce their use of solitary confinement and exactly how various reforms have actually impacted the lives of people living and working in the prisons where these reforms have taken place. METHODS: We conducted an embedded case study, analyzing changes in policies and procedures, administrative data, and focus groups and interviews with incarcerated persons and staff, to describe the circumstances that led to changes in solitary confinement policies and practices in the North Dakota Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (ND DOCR) and the perceived impact of these changes on incarcerated persons and prison staff. . RESULTS: North Dakota's correctional officials and staff members attributed the impetus to change their solitary confinement policies to their participation in a program that directly exposed them to the Norwegian Correctional Service's philosophy, policies, and practices in 2015. The ensuing policy changes made by North Dakota officials were swift and resulted in a 74.28% reduction in the use of solitary confinement between 2016 and 2020. Additionally, placements in any form of restrictive housing decreased markedly for incarcerated persons with serious mental illness. In the two prisons that had solitary confinement units, rule infractions involving violence decreased at one prison overall and it decreased within the units at both prisons that were previously used for solitary confinement. Although fights and assaults between incarcerated people increased in one of the prison's general population units, during the initial months of reforms, these events continued to decline compared to years before reform. Moreover, incarcerated people and staff attributed the rise to a concomitant worsening of conditions in the general population due to overcrowding, idleness, and double bunking. Both incarcerated persons and staff members reported improvements in their health and well-being, enhanced interactions with one another, and less exposure to violence following the reforms. CONCLUSIONS: Immersing correctional leaders in the Norwegian Correctional Service' public health and human rights principles motivated and guided the ND DOCR to pursue policy changes to decrease the use of solitary confinement in their prisons. Ensuing reductions in solitary confinement were experienced as beneficial to the health and wellness of incarcerated persons and staff alike. This case-study describes these policy changes and the perspectives of staff and incarcerated persons about the reforms that were undertaken. Findings have implications for stakeholders seeking to reduce their use of solitary confinement and limit its harmful consequences and underscore the need for research to describe and assess the impact of solitary confinement reforms.

Medical Isolation and Solitary Confinement: Balancing Health and Humanity in US Jails and Prisons During COVID-19.

In the face of the continually worsening COVID-19 pandemic, jails and prisons have become the greatest vectors of community transmission and are a point of heightened crisis and fear within the global crisis. Critical public health tools to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 are medical isolation and quarantine, but use of these tools is complicated in prisons and jails where decades of overuse of punitive solitary confinement is the norm. This has resulted in advocates denouncing the use of any form of isolation and attorneys litigating to end its use. It is essential to clarify the critical differences between punitive solitary confinement and the ethical use of medical isolation and quarantine during a pandemic. By doing so, then all those invested in stopping the spread of COVID-19 in prisons can work together to integrate medically sound, humane forms of medical isolation and quarantine that follow community standards of care rather than punitive forms of solitary confinement to manage COVID-19.

Smoking and Smoking Cessation Among Criminal Justice-Involved Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: In jails and prisons worldwide, older adults are among the fastest growing demographic groups. Criminal justice-involved populations smoke tobacco at high rates. Older adults are also disproportionate smokers and have more difficulty quitting smoking than other age groups. Yet, little is known about tobacco use or knowledge and attitudes toward smoking cessation among the growing population of incarcerated older adults. METHODS: A descriptive, cross-sectional survey study of 102 adults aged 55 years or older recently incarcerated in an urban jail using items from the Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATS). RESULTS: More than 70% of participants reported being current smokers despite strong knowledge (95%) of the connection between smoking and serious illness. More than half of current smokers reported a past failed quit attempt (62%) and/or said they would like to quit (60%). CONCLUSIONS: High rates of tobacco use in this population suggest that correctional institutions represent a critical site for the delivery of appropriate smoking cessation interventions to older adults, including integrated treatment approaches for those with co-occurring behavioral health diagnoses.

"No One Wants to Die Alone": Incarcerated Patients' Knowledge and Attitudes About Early Medical Release.

CONTEXT: Deaths among incarcerated individuals have steadily increased in the U.S., exceeding 5000 in 2014. Nearly every state has a policy to allow patients with serious life-limiting illness to apply for release from prison or jail to die in the community ("early medical release"). Although studies show these policies are rarely used, patient-level barriers to their use are unknown. OBJECTIVES: To assess incarcerated patients' knowledge of early medical release policies and to identify patient-level barriers to accessing these policies. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of 46 male patients in two state prisons and one large urban jail who had visited a primary care provider at least three times within three months was conducted. RESULTS: Participants' average age was 64 years, and 89% had more than one chronic illness. Fewer than half (43%) demonstrated the knowledge needed to apply for early medical release and 22% demonstrated no relevant knowledge. Participants with sufficient knowledge were significantly more likely to endorse anxiety (35% vs. 0%, P = .003) and loneliness (65% vs. 30%, P = .017). CONCLUSION: Many medically complex incarcerated patients in this study did not demonstrate sufficient knowledge to apply for early medical release suggesting that patient education may help expand access to these policies. Moreover, seriously ill patients with knowledge of early medical release may benefit from enhanced psychosocial support given their disproportionate burdens of anxiety and loneliness. Our findings highlight the pressing need for larger studies to assess whether improved patient education and support can expand access to early medical release.

"We Take Care of Patients, but We Don't Advocate for Them": Advance Care Planning in Prison or Jail.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate correctional healthcare providers' knowledge of and experience with advance care planning (ACP), their perspectives on barriers to ACP in correctional settings, and how to overcome those barriers. DESIGN: Qualitative. SETTING: Four prisons in 2 states and 1 large city jail in a third state. PARTICIPANTS: Correctional healthcare providers (e.g., physicians, nurses, social workers; N=24). RESULTS: Participants demonstrated low baseline ACP knowledge; 85% reported familiarity with ACP, but only 42% provided accurate definitions. Fundamental misconceptions included the belief that providers provided ACP without soliciting inmate input. Multiple ACP barriers were identified, many of which are unique to prison and jail facilities, including provider uncertainty about the legal validity of ACP documents in prison or jail, inmate mistrust of the correctional healthcare system, inmates' isolation from family and friends, and institutional policies that restrict use of ACP. Clinicians' suggestions for overcoming those barriers included ACP training for clinicians, creating psychosocial support opportunities for inmates, revising policies that limit ACP, and systematically integrating ACP into healthcare practice. CONCLUSION: Despite an increasing number of older and seriously ill individuals in prisons and jails, many correctional healthcare providers lack knowledge about ACP. In addition to ACP barriers found in the community, there are unique barriers to ACP in prisons and jails. Future research and policy innovation are needed to develop clinical training programs and identify ACP implementation strategies for use in correctional settings. J Am Geriatr Soc 66:2382-2388, 2018.

Cognition and Incarceration: Cognitive Impairment and Its Associated Outcomes in Older Adults in Jail.

OBJECTIVES: To determine prevalence of, and outcomes associated with, a positive screen for cognitive impairment in older adults in jail. DESIGN: Combined data from cross-sectional (n=185 participants) and longitudinal (n=125 participants) studies. SETTING: Urban county jail. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals in jail aged 55 and older (N = 310; mean age 59, range 55-80). Inclusion of individuals aged 55 and older is justified because the criminal justice system defines "geriatric prisoners" as those aged 55 and older. MEASUREMENTS: Baseline and follow-up assessments of health, psychosocial factors, and cognitive status (using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)); 6-month acute care use and repeat arrest assessed in those followed longitudinally. RESULTS: Participants were of low socioeconomic status (85% annual income < $15,000) and predominantly nonwhite (75%). Many (70%) scored less than 25 on the MoCA; those with a low MoCA score were more likely to be nonwhite (81% vs 62%, p<.001) and report fair or poor health (54% vs 41%, p=.04). Over 6 months, a MoCA score of less than 25 was associated with multiple emergency department visits (32% vs 13%, p=.02), hospitalization (35% vs 16%, p=.03), and repeat arrests (45% vs 21%, p=.01). CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive impairment is prevalent in older adults in jail and is associated with adverse health and criminal justice outcomes. A geriatric approach to jail-based and transitional health care should be developed to assess and address cognitive impairment. Additional research is needed to better assess cognitive impairment and its consequences in this population. J Am Geriatr Soc 66:2065-2071, 2018.

Balancing the Rights to Protection and Participation: A Call for Expanded Access to Ethically Conducted Correctional Health Research.

Incarcerated individuals, over 95% of whom are eventually released, experience high burdens of chronic disease and behavioral health and social risk factors. Understanding the health needs of this population is critical to ensuring that general medicine physicians in prisons and in the community are adequately prepared to meet those needs. However, people in prison are significantly underrepresented in health research. In response to historical exploitation of prisoners in medical experimentation, federal guidelines appropriately require additional oversight for, and limit the scope of, research in prisons. Yet, according to a 2006 Institute of Medicine report, these requirements have produced inconsistent local regulations that often limit opportunities for incarcerated individuals to participate in research, and can slow the development of innovative medical interventions to improve their health. In this article, we describe the historical context surrounding regulations on research involving individuals in prison, the harms that can arise from excessive limitations to research in such settings, and the benefits of greater access to ethically conducted research in prison. We conclude with recommended actions that can be taken by general medicine researchers, correctional leaders, and policymakers to achieve consistent access to health research for incarcerated populations.

Older adults in jail: high rates and early onset of geriatric conditions.

BACKGROUND: The number of older adults in the criminal justice system is rapidly increasing. While this population is thought to experience an early onset of aging-related health conditions ("accelerated aging"), studies have not directly compared rates of geriatric conditions in this population to those found in the general population. The aims of this study were to compare the burden of geriatric conditions among older adults in jail to rates found in an age-matched nationally representative sample of community dwelling older adults. METHODS: This cross sectional study compared 238 older jail inmates age 55 or older to 6871 older adults in the national Health and Retirement Study (HRS). We used an age-adjusted analysis, accounting for the difference in age distributions between the two groups, to compare sociodemographics, chronic conditions, and geriatric conditions (functional, sensory, and mobility impairment). A second age-adjusted analysis compared those in jail to HRS participants in the lowest quintile of wealth. RESULTS: All geriatric conditions were significantly more common in jail-based participants than in HRS participants overall and HRS participants in the lowest quintile of net worth. Jail-based participants (average age of 59) experienced four out of six geriatric conditions at rates similar to those found in HRS participants age 75 or older. CONCLUSIONS: Geriatric conditions are prevalent in older adults in jail at significantly younger ages than non-incarcerated older adults suggesting that geriatric assessment and geriatric-focused care are needed for older adults cycling through jail in their 50s and that correctional clinicians require knowledge about geriatric assessment and care.

Six-Month Emergency Department Use among Older Adults Following Jail Incarceration.

Although the number of older adults who are arrested and subject to incarceration in jail is rising dramatically, little is known about their emergency department (ED) use or the factors associated with that use. This lack of knowledge impairs the ability to design evidence-based approaches to care that would meet the needs of this population. This 6-month longitudinal study aimed to determine the frequency of 6-month ED use among 101 adults aged 55 or older enrolled while in jail and to identify factors associated with that use. The primary outcome was self-reported emergency department use within 6 months from baseline. Additional measures included baseline socio-demographics, physical and mental health conditions, geriatric factors (e.g., recent falls, incontinence, functional impairment, concern about post-release safety), symptoms (pain and other symptoms), and behavioral and social health risk factors (e.g., substance use disorders, recent homelessness). Chi-square tests were used to identify baseline factors associated with ED use over 6 months. Participants (average age 60) reported high rates of multimorbidity (61%), functional impairment (57%), pain (52%), serious mental illness (44%), recent homelessness (54%), and/or substance use disorders (69%). At 6 months, 46% had visited the ED at least once; 21% visited multiple times. Factors associated with ED use included multimorbidity (p = 0.01), functional impairment (p = 0.02), hepatitis C infection (p = 0.01), a recent fall (p = 0.03), pain (p < 0.001), loneliness (p = 0.04), and safety concerns (p = 0.01). In this population of older adults in a county jail, geriatric conditions and distressing symptoms were common and associated with 6-month community ED use. Jail is an important setting to develop geriatric care paradigms aimed at addressing comorbid medical, functional, and behavioral health needs and symptomatology in an effort to improve care and decrease ED use in the growing population of criminal justice-involved older adults.

Differences between incarcerated and non-incarcerated patients who die in community hospitals highlight the need for palliative care services for seriously ill prisoners in correctional facilities and in community hospitals: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Incarcerated populations worldwide are aging dramatically; in the United States, prisoner mortality rates have reached an all-time high. Little is known about the incarcerated patients who die in community hospitals. AIM: Compare incarcerated and non-incarcerated hospital decedents in California. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: All state hospital decedents ( N = 370,831) from 2009 to 2013, decedent age over time examined with additional data (2001-2013). RESULTS: Overall, 745 incarcerated and 370,086 non-incarcerated individuals died in California hospitals. Incarcerated decedents were more often male (93% vs 51%), Black (19% vs 8%) Latino (27% vs 19%), younger (55 vs 73 years), had shorter hospitalizations (13 vs 16 days), and fewer had an advance care plan (23% vs 36%, p < 0.05). Incarcerated decedents had higher rates of cancer, liver disease, HIV/AIDs, and mental health disorders. Cause of death was disproportionately missing for incarcerated decedents. The average age of incarcerated decedents rose between 2001 and 2013, while it remained stable for others. CONCLUSION: Palliative care services in correctional facilities should accommodate the needs of relatively young patients and those with mental illness. Given the simultaneous growth in the older prisoner population with the rising age of incarcerated hospital decedents, community hospital clinicians should be prepared to care for seriously ill, incarcerated patients. Significant epidemiologic differences between incarcerated and non-incarcerated decedents in this study suggest the importance of examining the differential palliative care needs of incarcerated patients in all communities.

Wealth-Associated Disparities in Death and Disability in the United States and England.

Importance: Low income has been associated with poor health outcomes. Owing to retirement, wealth may be a better marker of financial resources among older adults. Objective: To determine the association of wealth with mortality and disability among older adults in the United States and England. Design, Setting, and Participants: The US Health and Retirement Study (HRS) and English Longitudinal Study of Aging (ELSA) are nationally representative cohorts of community-dwelling older adults. We examined 12 173 participants enrolled in HRS and 7599 enrolled in ELSA in 2002. Analyses were stratified by age (54-64 years vs 66-76 years) because many safety-net programs commence around age 65 years. Participants were followed until 2012 for mortality and disability. Exposures: Wealth quintile, based on total net worth in 2002. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mortality and disability, defined as difficulty performing an activity of daily living. Results: A total of 6233 US respondents and 4325 English respondents aged 54 to 64 years (younger cohort) and 5940 US respondents and 3274 English respondents aged 66 to 76 years (older cohort) were analyzed for the mortality outcome. Slightly over half of respondents were women (HRS: 6570, 54%; ELSA: 3974, 52%). A higher proportion of respondents from HRS were nonwhite compared with ELSA in both the younger (14% vs 3%) and the older (13% vs 3%) age cohorts. We found increased risk of death and disability as wealth decreased. In the United States, participants aged 54 to 64 years in the lowest wealth quintile (Q1) (≤$39 000) had a 17% mortality risk and 48% disability risk over 10 years, whereas in the highest wealth quintile (Q5) (>$560 000) participants had a 5% mortality risk and 15% disability risk (mortality hazard ratio [HR], 3.3; 95% CI, 2.0-5.6; P < .001; disability subhazard ratio [sHR], 4.0; 95% CI, 2.9-5.6; P < .001). In England, participants aged 54 to 64 years in Q1 (≤£34,000) had a 16% mortality risk and 42% disability risk over 10 years, whereas Q5 participants (>£310,550) had a 4% mortality risk and 17% disability risk (mortality HR, 4.4; 95% CI, 2.7-7.0; P < .001; disability sHR, 3.0; 95% CI, 2.1-4.2; P < .001). In 66- to 76-year-old participants, the absolute risks of mortality and disability were higher, but risk gradients across wealth quintiles were similar. When adjusted for sex, age, race, income, and education, HR for mortality and sHR for disability were attenuated but remained statistically significant. Conclusions and Relevance: Low wealth was associated with death and disability in both the United States and England. This relationship was apparent from age 54 years and continued into later life. Access to health care may not attenuate wealth-associated disparities in older adults.